Antimicrobials Used in Backyard and Commercial Poultry and Swine Farms in the Philippines: A Qualitative Pilot Study

被引:20
作者
Barroga, Toni Rose M. [1 ,2 ]
Morales, Reildrin G. [1 ,3 ]
Benigno, Carolyn C. [4 ]
Castro, Samuel Joseph M. [2 ]
Caniban, Mardi M. [2 ]
Cabullo, Maria Fe B. [2 ]
Agunos, Agnes [4 ,6 ]
de Balogh, Katinka [4 ]
Dorado-Garcia, Alejandro [5 ]
机构
[1] Food & Agr Org United Nat, Philippine Component Global Efforts Combat Antimi, Quezon City, Philippines
[2] Bur Anim Ind, Dept Agr, Quezon City, Philippines
[3] Natl Meat Inspect Serv, Dept Agr, Quezon City, Philippines
[4] Food & Agr Org United Nat, Reg Off Asia & Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand
[5] Food & Agr Org United Nat, Rome, Italy
[6] Publ Hlth Agcy Canada, Ctr Foodborne Environm & Zoonot Infect Dis, Guelph, ON, Canada
关键词
farm level; antimicrobials; surveillance; poultry; swine; Philippines; LMIC; RESISTANCE;
D O I
10.3389/fvets.2020.00329
中图分类号
S85 [动物医学(兽医学)];
学科分类号
0906 ;
摘要
Chicken and pork are the most frequently consumed meat products in the Philippines. Swine and poultry are reared in either commercial farms (CMf) or backyard farms (BYf); the latter production system is relatively common and essential to food security in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) such as the Philippines. Similar to resource-limited LMICs, antimicrobial use (AMU) surveillance has not yet been established; thus, AMU in food animals is a knowledge gap in understanding the emergence of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in zoonotic foodborne bacteria in the country. This qualitative AMU pilot study aims to describe the antimicrobial active ingredients (AAIs) used and associated AMU practices (e.g., source of AAIs and informed AMU decisions) by poultry and swine CMf and BYf in the Philippines. Ninety-three farms across four regions in the Philippines voluntarily provided AMU information as part of a larger biosecurity and good practices study. The percentage of farms using AAI over the total number of farms was the metric used to describe AMU. In total, there were 30 AAIs used (CMf:n=27 and BYf:n= 13); per farm, the number of AAIs used ranged from 1 to 7. The spectrum of AAIs was more diverse in swine (n= 24) compared to poultry (n= 18). Enrofloxacin was the most frequently reported AAI in poultry (33%) and swine (36%) farms. Respiratory diseases were the most frequently reported reason for AMU in both species. Between production systems, significant differences were observed in the percentage of farms using amoxicillin (27% CMf vs. 3% BYf), colistin (17% CMf vs. 3% BYf), and oxytetracycline (12% CMf vs. 39% BYf). In terms of AMU practices, of important concern was the over-the-counter access of AAIs at retail outlets and the limited veterinary oversight in BYf. Our data indicated that antimicrobials critically important for human medicine are frequently used in poultry and swine farms in the Philippines. This study can inform the development of guidelines for curbing AMR through prudent AMU and serves as a reference point for AMU surveillance capacity development in the Philippines.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 30 条
  • [1] AACTING network on quantification benchmarking and reporting of veterinary antimicrobial usage at farm level, 2018, AACTING NETWORK QUAN
  • [2] Molecular characterization and antimicrobial resistance of Salmonella enterica from swine slaughtered in two different types of Philippine abattoir
    Calayag, Alyzza Marie B.
    Paclibare, Phyllis Anne P.
    Santos, Pauline Dianne M.
    Bautista, Corinne Aimee C.
    Rivera, Windell L.
    [J]. FOOD MICROBIOLOGY, 2017, 65 : 51 - 56
  • [3] Carson CA, 2008, CAN J VET RES, V72, P109
  • [4] Towards a bottom-up understanding of antimicrobial use and resistance on the farm: A knowledge, attitudes, and practices survey across livestock systems in five African countries
    Caudell, Mark A.
    Dorado-Garcia, Alejandro
    Eckford, Suzanne
    Creese, Chris
    Byarugaba, Denis K.
    Afakye, Kofi
    Chansa-Kabali, Tamara
    Fasina, Folorunso O.
    Kabali, Emmanuel
    Kiambi, Stella
    Kimani, Tabitha
    Mainda, Geoffrey
    Mangesho, Peter E.
    Chimpangu, Francis
    Dube, Kululeko
    Kikimoto, Bashiru Boi
    Koka, Eric
    Mugara, Tendai
    Rubegwa, Bachana
    Swiswa, Samuel
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2020, 15 (01):
  • [5] Anthropological and socioeconomic factors contributing to global antimicrobial resistance: a univariate and multivariable analysis
    Collignon, Peter
    Beggs, John J.
    Walsh, Timothy R.
    Gandra, Sumanth
    Laxminarayan, Ramanan
    [J]. LANCET PLANETARY HEALTH, 2018, 2 (09) : E398 - E405
  • [6] Guidance on the Selection of Appropriate Indicators for Quantification of Antimicrobial Usage in Humans and Animals
    Collineau, L.
    Belloc, C.
    Stark, K. D. C.
    Hemonic, A.
    Postma, M.
    Dewulf, J.
    Chauvin, C.
    [J]. ZOONOSES AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2017, 64 (03) : 165 - 184
  • [7] Characterizing Antimicrobial Use in the Livestock Sector in Three South East Asian Countries (Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam)
    Coyne, Lucy
    Arief, Riana
    Benigno, Carolyn
    Vo Ngan Giang
    Luu Quynh Huong
    Jeamsripong, Saharuetai
    Kalpravidh, Wantanee
    McGrane, James
    Padungtod, Pawin
    Patrick, Ian
    Schoonman, Luuk
    Setyawan, Erry
    Sukarno, Ady Harja
    Srisamran, Jutanat
    Pham Thi Ngoc
    Rushton, Jonathan
    [J]. ANTIBIOTICS-BASEL, 2019, 8 (01):
  • [8] European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control European Food Safety Authority and European Medicines Agency, 2017, ECDC EFSA EMA 2 JOIN, DOI 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4872/epdf
  • [9] European Medicines Agency, 2019, ADV IMP US ANT AN
  • [10] European Medicines Agency, 2013, EMA2864162012REV144, P1